The reality of Climate Change is a huge challenge and environmentalists are right to be pushing Governments, Corporates and individuals alike to change fundamentally many aspects of society, long established business models and lifestyles. Huge changes that require brave and farsighted decisions by politicians and business leaders.
One group however has so far ducked the brave decisions and refused to change long cherished beliefs. I am referring to the environmental movement and nuclear power. On the one hand environmentalists rightly point out the huge dangers and costs of not rapidly moving to a low carbon economy and on the other hand are sticking by their 30 year old opposition to nuclear power.
Climate change fundamentally alters the equation on whether nuclear is a good or bad way to generate electricity. It is our only proven, well-established technology that could very quickly start to replace fossil fuel electricity production.
It is a false choice to say it is nuclear or renewables. It is renewables and nuclear or fossil fuels. Any Government has to give an overwhelming priority to energy security. How are environmentalists proposing that we keep the electricity flowing on a cold still February morning? Nuclear power is the only low carbon technology we currently have that can do this. Obviously if we can phase it out again in 50 years when better options are available that will be fantastic, but we need to act now.
Climate Change requires tough brave decisions and changes to the way that we have been doing things for centuries. Environmentalists should not be ducking those brave decisions themselves whilst they ask them of everybody else. We need to stop pretending that Climate Change has not fundamentally altered the nuclear power debate and that arguments developed 20 years ago are still valid. Nuclear power is the least worst option for secure, reliable, economic bulk electricity generation.
Environmentalists rightly place much emphasis on reducing electricity consumption. This is of course sensible and the best long term option. But again you have to ask yourself the question, what is going to be easier and quicker – persuading 20 million consumers to turn their TV’s off at the wall and all the other myriad lifestyle changes, or simply making the UK’s electricity supply low carbon?
A key part of Environmentalists’ anti-nuclear argument has been to not bequeath nuclear waste to future generations to deal with. But you have to ask yourself, would future generations rather deal with a few hundred m3 of highly radioactive waste in carefully engineered and monitored facilities or millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide loose in the atmosphere forcing dramatic climate change?
The UK Government will soon be announcing a new nuclear power program. Environmentalists have to ask themselves carefully, are they going to be part of the (imperfect) solution or be part of the problem? Opposing nuclear power is simply going to delay plants. What will happen during that time? Electricity will continue to be produced by burning coal and gas and millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide will have been released into the atmosphere. It is not nuclear or renewables, it is nuclear or fossil.
It’s time for us all to make some tough and unpleasant decisions and environmentalists are no exception.
You can comment on this article or send me an email directly.